Liberal Arts Education

In the Western history of higher education, there is a claim that liberal arts education is the oldest programme. Initially, it attempts to discover the universal principles that give possible condition to the existence of everything. The skills provided by liberal arts subjects were essential to establishing a free person to allow civic life participation. Thus, liberal arts education presents a tradition of a broad education that presents multiple fields such as philosophy, literature, physical sciences, and math.  A considerable number of institutions including more prominent research universities and specifically designated liberal arts colleges offer liberal arts. However, because of the traditional perspective of the liberal arts, many people in the recent have regarded the programme as insignificant. They find it useless to spend time outside their field of study to attend liberal arts classes. It is in this perspective that Sanford J. Ungar finds convenience to dismiss the critics of the liberal arts which have seen the program hit the scrutiny for accepted ideals. However, different authors seem to support Ungar that the decision to scrutinize liberal arts education to regard it useless has been based on misconceptions which should not hold.

Sanford Ungar clearly and swiftly moves to advocate for liberal arts education in a counter move through his reactions on the misconceptions. Ungar claims that despite the current economic hardship the Americans face, there is a need for all to access a liberal arts college education. Ungar creates a view among the readers that engaging in new liberal arts will help to bring solutions to some of the economic challenges that the country faces. Thus, by completely ignoring liberal arts education, it creates favorable conditions for persistent financial hardship. Ungar enlists at least the most familiar seven misconceptions about liberal arts education then goes ahead to express why they are indeed misleading.

Ungar starts with the first misconception which perceives the degree in liberal arts as a luxury yet the status of many families today does not allow them to afford it. It is almost becoming basic that families prefer going for career education. In this misconception, Ungar does agree with what is perceived as a quick fix when students focus majorly in career training. Indeed it is correct based on the factor that families do struggle especially in economic hardship to get their children through education. However, it is within the view of others that liberal arts offer a traditional and well-rounded preparation for students to place them in a better investment position. The argument by Ungar is indeed factual in the sense that the current economic condition needs serious solutions. However, these solutions cannot be found if we have people who have only been prepared to focus on job training. Families should have a subtle understanding of the complexity of the world around them for quicker solutions.

The second misconception which is not far much different from what the first one says states that students with liberal arts are finding difficulties in finding jobs. According to this misconception, employers find it hard to employee people with irrelevant majors like philosophy something that Ungar disputes. He argues that it is not always the case that a student will get work in the specific areas trained and as things stand, all college graduates irrespective of whether they have pursued liberal arts or not, are finding difficulties in securing jobs. Relying on the survey by Association of American Colleges and Universities, employers want people with liberal education since they are knowledgeable and skilled all round to handle any challenges. In reality, the argument by Ungar draws support from multiple unemployment investigative reports. These reports indicate that indicate that unemployment levels among college graduates have increased in recent years and likely to rise further.

The third misconception which Ungar presents that college students perceived as the first generation and low-income are likely not suitable for liberal arts. Instead, these students need to divert their energy towards marketable and practical things. Ungar perceives this as prejudicing the poor who only are supposed to carry the ideas of the rich folks. He sees the need for all these people to have the finer elements of knowledge. He develops a feeling that instead, everyone should be appreciated for what he/she brings on the table. Indeed, what Ungar presents reflects the actions of the American society which for quite a long period subdivided people into different socioeconomic groups and treats them differently. This is the society that Ungar is trying to portray based on this misconception. So, what happens is that some groups who can do the best are denied opportunity to try it out.

According to Ungar, the fourth misconception is that modern days call for new things and that focusing only on arts pauses a challenge. Instead, in contemporary society, it is better if people can focus on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Ungar however, disputes this claim saying that in fact, liberal arts have multiple disciples such as social sciences and humanities. The term arts and sciences are used to clarify on liberal arts to show the broadness of the issues being perceived to be articulated in the new education that disregards liberal arts. From what he stands, somebody can note that less has been done to show the need to switch to these technical disciplines such as technology and engineering. If anything, Ungar has a feeling that these subjects have already been made part of liberal arts.

Liberal arts education is viewed from the political perspective going by the fifth misconception Ungar presents about the liberal democrats being responsible for the troubles the country faced recently. Thus, critics worry that the continuous indoctrinating of young people with liberal education puts the country at risk. Ungar moves swiftly to distance liberal education from politics but also advances for its conservativeness for life. He further advocates for open mindedness that liberal education instills in learners on how they can base on a variety of ideas for a solution. In other words, Ungar seems to be associating liberal education with the excellent leadership of the country. Students with liberal knowledge tend to listen, weigh alternatives, and come up with the best decision. Ungar refutes the sixth misconception that puts America as the only country that still clings on liberal arts as other countries run away. He, however, challenges this based on the fact that our systems and cultures are different from one country to another. Ungar feels that what may be useful for another country may not be suitable for American depending on the arrangements that are there such as time for specialization. Talking of differences, it is convincing that different countries have different systems and the American system is different from the system offered in the United Kingdom.

In his final misconception, Ungar presents the idea that despite the cost of higher education going up; liberal arts education has no proof that they are producing. He, however, disapproves this based on the fact that not all institutions offer liberal arts but a few. However, the cost seems to affect entire America, then how is liberal arts education a factor. In his words, Ungar appears to be blaming the government for the current increased cost in college education in America. His argument makes sense since the education system is extensive that a single system cannot drive it to an unwanted place. He, however, sums his discussion with a suggestion of having residential liberal-arts colleges that will give a close interaction between the stakeholders. As the efficiency of these liberal arts college comes into question, it is hopeful that the continuing debate will clear off these misconceptions.

 

Ist Scholar

Clara Haberberger in his text “A return to understanding: Making liberal education valuable again” gives illustration and clarification on how liberal arts education can be made valuable once more. The text is an illustration in the sense that it examines some historical information on the excellent performance of liberal arts education and how it has been devalued today. The text as well in a unique way goes beyond what Ungar presents, to look at the alternative ways the liberal arts education can become valuable once again. By offering this alternative, Haberberger does not necessarily refute claims by Ungar that liberal arts education is still useful, he only clarifies that despite its significance, it has been devalued. Haberberger, therefore suggests that liberal arts college could preserve their inherent value in the society if they make a turn back to the core curriculum of offering more traditional philosophies of liberal arts education. Hence, this clarifies the point by Ungar that liberal education is still needed in society.

Haberberger observes that since the 1990s towards the contemporary world, liberal education has been under severe threat. One factor leading to this has been the decision by the liberal arts colleges to offer curriculum perceived to be more professional. This is based on the fear that if liberal arts education is not treated as vocational, it will lead to its demise. Another one is that universities and colleges tend to portray some values that are perceived to have been inherently liberal. The situation is likely to render liberal arts colleges superfluous serving as educational institutions based on the fact that they are currently not useful in society.

Amidst this condition, colleges in American continue to profess that they still value and offer liberal arts education. In a similar move, both Netherlands and Europe continue to revival liberal arts education by establishing a more liberal arts college owing to its usefulness in addressing the issues in the society. However, we still have the notion that Ungar talks about of devaluing liberal education despite its importance and the struggle to have it full back functioning. Thus, Haberberger proposes that “liberal arts colleges should focus on understanding and self-reflection” when offering liberal education to remain highly distinguished and valued.

2ND Scholar

Another scholar Jeffrey Scheuer who is the author of “Critical Thinking and the Liberal Arts” warns of neglecting liberal arts that it is a risky thing for the country to do. Like Ungar, Jeffrey Scheuer extends the voice behind the tire need for liberal arts in the current world even as the country tries to give it a back. However, with Scheuer, he tries to answer the many questions that people may ask about liberal arts including its meaning and why scholars think should be retained. By answering this questions, we can say that Scheuer expands on the liberal arts education by examining its long history and how it can provide diverse knowledge and skills that the world may need in addressing the so many challenges. He writes, “America’s liberal arts colleges, embraces the idea of the integrated curriculum, encompassing virtually all nonprofessional higher learning, from the natural and social sciences to the humanities and the performing arts.”

Further, Scheuer clarifies on the traditional defense of liberal arts by presenting two key elements including critical thinking and economic citizenship. Students should be encouraged to undertake liberal arts since it systematic and provides information more comprehensively. Thus, the students are subjected to critical thinking that facilitates them acquire more knowledge that can be directed towards finding solutions in the current world. Ungar in his text expressed admission that American seems to be experiencing economic hardships. Ungar then argued that instead of institutions scrutinizing liberal arts education, they should promote it. However, more comprehensively, Scheuer presents an idea of economic citizenship as an element of liberal arts. Scheuer argues that it is by people becoming productive that they can address the question of economic hardship.

Conclusion

In conclusion, therefore, it is evident that both Scheuer and Haberberger support the idea by Ungar that institutional and ideal scrutiny of liberal arts is not based on facts but misconceptions. Ungar identifies some of these misconceptions most of them based on the fact that liberal arts education is not relevant in the contemporary world. At least, many people believe that liberal arts major is too general and you one might not secure employment. However, Ungar goes ahead to disapprove their ideas by counter statements some based on evidence. At some point, Ungar admits that all college graduates face the issue of unemployment whether they pursue liberal arts or not and gives the advantages of liberal arts especially in providing broad knowledge. Both Scheuer and Haberberger illustrate, clarify, and in some cases expand on these issues addressed by Ungar.

 
Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?

Custom Essay writing Service